We are IntechOpen,

the world’s leading publisher of

Open Access books
Built by scientists, for scientists

3,900
Open access books available
116,000
International authors and editors
120M Downloads

Our authors are among the

154
Countries delivered to
TOP 1%
most cited scientists
12.2%
Contributors from top 500 universities

Selection of our books indexed in the Book Citation Index

in Web of Science™ Core Collection (BKCI)

Interested in publishing with us?

Contact book.department@intechopen.com
Numbers displayed above are based on latest data collected.
For more information visit www.intechopen.com
Chapter

A Smart Battery Management

System for Photovoltaic Plants
in Households Based on Raw
Production Forecast
Filippo Spertino, Alessandro Ciocia, Paolo Di Leo,
Gabriele Malgaroli and Angela Russo

Abstract

A basic battery management system (BMS) permits the safe charge/discharge of

the batteries and the supply of loads. Batteries are protected to avoid fast degrada-
tion: the minimum and maximum state-of-charge (SOC) limits are not exceeded
and fast charge/discharge cycles are not permitted. A more sophisticated BMS con-
nected to a photovoltaic (PV) generator could also work with the double purpose of
protecting storage and reducing peak demand. Peak reduction by storage generally
requires the forecast of consumption and PV generation profiles to perform a pro-
visional energy balance. To do it, it is required to have accurate information about
production profiles, that is, to have at disposal accurate weather forecasts, which
are not easily available. In the present work, an efficient BMS in grid-connected
PV plants for residential users is described. Starting from raw 1-day ahead weather
forecast and prediction of consumption, the proposed BMS preserves battery
charge when it is expected high load and low PV production and performs peak
shaving with a negligible reduction in self-sufficiency.

Keywords: battery management systems, photovoltaic system, storage,

self-sufficiency, peak shaving

1. Introduction

Recently, the installation of renewable energy systems (RES), such as photovol-

taic (PV) generators, has increased due to dedicated policies and even lower invest-
ment costs [1]. The increasing share of RES has introduced new challenges, which
in future can affect the proper operation of the system: for example, the decrease
of the system inertia faced by introducing new inverter controls [2]. At distribution
system level, the large share of RES led researcher to consider new way to manage
the system, by means of optimal reconfiguration procedure based on different
methodology [3] and time periods [4]. The main drawback of RES is the intermit-
tency of power production, which often results in a not well match between electric
consumption and generation profiles [5, 6], with consequent voltage deviations and
reverse power flow issues [7]. In order to reduce voltage deviations, it is possible

1
Green Energy Advances

to upgrade grid lines and transformers, but it is generally expensive. Otherwise, it

is possible to reduce injection from renewable sources by increasing the supply of
local loads. It can be done by load shifting, which consists of the switching on of
home appliances, when PV generators are working. This procedure can be manual
by using simple timed switches; for example, the user has to switch on the washing
machine or the dishwasher at midday, when the production is maximum. To per-
form load shifting, in [8], it is developed an algorithm to predict the consumption
based on hourly historical data using artificial neural networks (ANNs).
Using electrochemical storage with PV generators is a good alternative to
mitigate or eliminate power injection issues. Storage is easy to install and manage in
any site; in the last years, the cost of storage decreases, but it is still expensive and
it cannot solve the seasonal correlation between low loads and high RES produc-
tion, and vice versa. For this reason, in case of domestic users, the best technical-
economic solution is the use of a small battery system (BS) and the adoption of load
shifting. This solution permits the reduction of absorption or injection peaks and
the increase of self-sufficiency level, that is, the ratio between the local RES produc-
tion used to supply loads and the total loads.
A battery management system (BMS) is a hardware/software solution which
checks the correct operation of batteries: in its basic version, it simply charges
the batteries, when they are empty, and discharges them when necessary. It limits
battery operation only to protect them: the exceeds of minimum and maximum
state-of-charge (SOC) limits and fast charge/discharge cycles are not permitted to
avoid fast degradation [9]. An improvement in the BMS management consists of
the forecast of load and PV generation profiles [10, 11]. In this case, it is necessary
to have accurate information about production profiles, which are generally miss-
ing. In addition, the BMS has to continuously obtain accurate weather forecasts,
which are not easily available. In [12], a modified control strategy for batteries
based on peak shaving is proposed to reduce power fluctuations of production in a
PV-storage system and obtain benefits in terms of electricity price. In [13], a more
accurate BMS for a PV-storage system is developed: the proposed management
strategy aims to shave consumptions peaks, taking into account degradation of
batteries and aging limits of the storage. A real-time battery management algorithm
is proposed in [14] to reduce the peak demand power and the daily energy cost in
grid-connected PV-storage systems. In particular, the charge/discharge of the stor-
age is controlled using instantaneous load data. Each day, 1-day ahead prediction
of PV generation and load profiles is performed to decide the power limit beyond
which the peak shaving strategy works. Finally, in [15], several control strategies
of batteries are compared for a residential battery energy storage system (BESS)
coupled with a PV generator. In particular, a base control strategy charges the
battery when PV production exceeds local loads and starts to discharge the storage
in the evening, when PV generation is negligible. It is compared to three optimized
BMSs: the first one aims to maximize the economic benefits for the users or the self-
sufficiency, while the second one includes utility constraints to lower overvoltage
risks on distribution grid and the third is a distributed control.
In the present chapter, positive aspects regarding the grid stability, i.e., fre-
quency and voltage control [16–18], are not taken into account, and only the benefit
for the users, consisting of the reduction of absorption peaks with a possible
consequent reduction of contracted power, is investigated. In addition, load shift-
ing is not considered, due to difficulties in convincing domestic users to change
their habits. Indeed, a smart battery management system (SBMS), which works
with raw forecasts of production and historical consumption data, is proposed: the
goal of the control is to reduce the absorption peaks from the grid with minimum
reduction in self-sufficiency and no load shifting. In particular, in case of high

2
A Smart Battery Management System for Photovoltaic Plants in Households Based on Raw…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.80562

consumption and low production, a traditional BMS completely discharges the

batteries and all the renewable energy is locally consumed. In the proposed SBMS,
the storage will not be totally discharged and will not completely supply the loads.
In fact, the storage discharge is limited to satisfy possible absorption peaks in a
period up to few days. Nevertheless, if the storage is not discharged waiting for
possible consumption peaks, it means that the baseload could not be satisfied with
a consequent reduction of self-sufficiency. The self-sufficiency is calculated to
check the effectiveness of the proposed SBMS: the domestic user has to keep high
its self-sufficiency level, because it corresponds to an economic return. The benefit
for the grid is not taken into account, but it exists: it consists of a reduction in peak
absorption from the grid resulting in higher power quality, lower voltage dips, and
reverse power flow issues [19, 20].
The next sections of the chapter will be organized in the following way. In Section
2, the description of the system setup, the inputs for the simulation, and the models
of the PV generator and the battery will be presented. In Section 3, the provisional
energy balance and the storage management are described in detail. In Sections 4 and
5, the results of the simulations and the conclusions are discussed, respectively.

2. The simulated PV-storage system

2.1 Description of the system

A scheme of a PV-storage residential system is presented in Figure 1. The main

components of the power system are a PV generator, an electrochemical BMS, DC/
DC and DC/AC power converters, AC loads, and the distribution grid. The PV
modules are connected to a maximum power point tracker (MPPT) in order to work
in the maximum power point in every irradiance and temperature condition [21].
The BMS measures DC current and voltage and temperature of batteries. The SOC
is continuously calculated in order to estimate the residual charge of the storage; in
this way, the BMS avoids an abnormal degradation of the batteries due to not opti-
mal charging patterns, overcharging, undercharging, and abnormal temperatures.

Figure 1.
The PV-storage system under study.

3
Green Energy Advances

The DC/AC converter connects the PV system and the BESS to the AC side, i.e.,
local loads and the grid. Moreover, the device is Internet-connected and downloads
raw weather forecast of 1-day ahead, compares provisional load and production
profile, and adopts the best strategy to reduce consumption peaks.

2.2 Usage of PVGIS for estimation of irradiance profiles

The production of PV generators depends on installation conditions (loca-

tion and tilt and azimuth of the PV modules) and on weather conditions (solar
irradiance and temperature). The Photovoltaic Geographical Information System
(PVGIS) [22] database is a free online tool; it permits to know the average daily
irradiance and temperature profiles corresponding to each month of the year. The
monthly profiles can be obtained for every location in Europe, Africa, and Asia
starting from the definition of the location of the generator and the tilt and the
azimuth of the PV modules. Additional parameters can be selected, such as the
typology of solar radiation database and the calculation of irradiation profiles, also
for tracking systems. In Figure 2, the home screen of PVGIS database is shown.
The PVGIS database provides a temperature profile and three irradiance profiles
for each month. In particular, the irradiance profiles correspond to a clear sky day,
an average day, and an overcast day. During the clear sky day, the global irradia-
tion is maximum; in fact, it is mainly composed of the beam contribution, because
no clouds are present. During the overcast day, the solar irradiation is minimum;
in fact, in case of cloudy and rainy days, only the diffuse component of the solar
irradiance is present. The average day is an intermediate situation: it is based on
the average irradiance condition occurring in the month under consideration. In
Figure 3, an example of the output profiles of the software is presented for January;
the selected location is in Italy (Turin, 45.05° Nord, 7° 40' Est) and the PV modules
are installed with an inclination of 15° and West oriented (azimuth = 90°, where
South = 0°). Data are provided with a time step of 15 min.
In the present chapter, it is supposed to install a single device including both the
PV converter and the BMS; the BMS will be equipped with additional hardware and
software capable of accessing Internet and download data from the PVGIS database.
After the installation of the PV generator, during the setting up of the converter, the
input parameters requested by PVGIS to estimate the irradiance and temperature
profiles are inserted in the software of the device.

Figure 2.
PVGIS website.

4
A Smart Battery Management System for Photovoltaic Plants in Households Based on Raw…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.80562

Figure 3.
Irradiance and temperature profiles for January in Turin (Italy) from PVGIS database; PV modules have
inclination of 15° and West orientation.

The device accesses the PVGIS database and downloads and elaborates the three
above-described irradiation profiles for each month. Starting from these data and
the rated power of the PV generator, the power converter calculates a total of 36 PV
production profiles by an appropriate photovoltaic model, which will be described
in detail in Section 2.3. Finally, the power generation profiles are integrated over
the entire day: the result is a list of daily energy productions for each month in three
different weather conditions. Table 1 shows the daily energy production of a PV
generator with rated power of 1 kWp installed as defined in Figure 3.

2.3 Modeling of PV generators

Regarding the PV power simulation, the AC power production PAC is calcu-

lated according to the model described in [23]. The inputs of the model are solar
irradiance G, ambient temperature Ta, and rated power of the PV generator PPV,r.

PV production (kWh/kWp) Clear sky day Average day Overcast day

January 2.0 1.5 0.8

February 3.0 2.5 1.0
March 4.3 3.7 1.6
April 5.6 4.3 1.8
May 6.4 5.2 2.2
June 6.6 5.6 2.2
July 6.5 5.8 1.9
August 5.8 5.0 1.8
September 4.6 3.9 1.5
October 3.3 2.5 1.3
November 2.2 1.6 0.8
December 1.8 1.3 0.7

Table 1.
Daily energy production for each month in three different weather conditions.

5
Green Energy Advances

The thermal losses and consequently the DC input power change, while the other
sources of losses are considered constant:

G ∙η
PAC = PPV,r ∙ ____ mix ∙ η therm ∙ η DC/AC (1)
GSTC

with

η mix = η dirt ∙ η refl ∙ η mis ∙ η MPPT ∙ η cabl ∙ η shad (2)

Losses due to temperature η therm are due to the reduction in the voltage of the PV
generation with increasing temperature. The power loss with respect to the stan-
dard test condition is linearly dependent on temperature with proportionality factor
about γth ≈ 0.3 ÷ 0.5%/°C depending on the semiconductor of the photovoltaic
generator [24]. According to [25], a value of 0.5%/°C, typical for c-Si PV modules,
which is the most diffused PV technology for terrestrial applications, is used. In
order to estimate temperature losses, at every time step, the temperature of the PV
cells Tc is calculated starting from measured air temperature Ta by the following
equation [26]:

°
NOCT − 20 C ∙ G
Tc = Ta ∙ __________ (3)
GNOCT

NOCT is the normal operating cell temperature, generally provided by the

manufacturer of the PV modules; in this work, it corresponds to a typical value
NOCT = 45°C. GNOCT is the solar irradiance occurring at NOCT condition and it
is 800 W/m2; the overtemperature losses ηtherm (with respect to TSTC = 25°C) are
calculated by the formula:

η therm = 1 − γ th ∙ (Tc − TSTC) (4)

Losses due to dirt ηdirt provide an average 2% of reduction in energy produc-

tion for the deposit of dust and other materials on the glass of the modules. Thus,
a typical value ηdirt = 0.98 is used in the present work [27, 28]. Note that in case of
horizontal modules, the cleaning made by rain is reduced, and in case of emission
of pollution close to the plants from special industrial processes [29], losses can
be more than 7%. Losses due to reflection from the glass on the front of the PV
module are inevitable losses due to a not ideal transparency of the glass; according
to [30], they can be considered equal to ≈3% (ηrefl = 0.97). Mismatch losses are due
to nonuniformity in I-V characteristics of modules connected in series or in paral-
lel. Thus, the conversion unit imposes to the whole PV generator a working point
not perfectly corresponding to the optimum. According to [31], a typical value of
ηmis = 0.97 is used. Joule losses take into account dissipation of electrical energy
into heat by Joule effect in the cables. During design phase, cables should be sized
in order to keep Joule losses within 3% in nominal conditions [30]. Since the PV
system operates at nominal conditions (maximum power) for a short period during
the year, and in other conditions (partial load) losses are lower, Joule losses are
estimated equal to an average value of 1% (ηcab l = 0.99) [30]. Losses for shadings are
due to external causes, as a wrong design; thus, in the performed simulations, these
losses are neglected (ηshad = 1). Regarding the accuracy of the maximum power point
tracking (MPPT) system, it causes losses, because the optimum value is generally
not perfectly tracked, especially at low power: on average, this loss can be estimated
≈1%. (ηMPPT = 0.99) [32]. Finally, the DC/AC conversion introduces losses, which

6
A Smart Battery Management System for Photovoltaic Plants in Households Based on Raw…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.80562

are quadratically dependent on the power output. For the sake of simplicity, an
average value of ηDC/AC = 0.97 is considered in the present work [33].

2.4 Modeling of electrochemical storage

A correct model of the storage is fundamental to evaluate energy flows. Many

electric models are present in literature and they permit to simulate operation of
batteries with different pros and cons [34–37]. The simplest model describes a
battery by an equivalent voltage source in series with an internal resistance. The
equivalent voltage can easily be determined by measuring the open circuit voltage
of the battery, while the measurement of the internal resistance requires a further
test performed during battery charge. Obviously, this model has a limited use,
because the parameters are constant: the accumulator results in having an infinite
capacity and there is no way to determine the SOC. An upgrade with respect to the
basic model is obtained using an equivalent resistive-capacitive model [36]. The
values of resistances and capacitances can be determined through impulsive test
of the battery. The advantage of this model is that it permits to evaluate the charge
and discharge transients with variable loads in time. However, the SOC dependence
on the voltage, which has to be determined, requires careful preliminary measure-
ments on the battery. Another possible model consists of the impedance model,
where a voltage source is in series with a resistance and an inductance. An addi-
tional series impedance is used to represent the electrochemical characteristics of
the battery. Nevertheless, the definition of this impedance is complicated; in fact, it
can be obtained starting from an electrochemical impedance spectroscopy to obtain
an equivalent impedance in the frequency domain. In addition, the impedance has
to be characterized varying the state of charge and the temperature [35].
The most sophisticated models [38, 39] are developed to calculate also the state
of health (SOH), which is a parameter useful to evaluate how the charge-discharge
profiles affect the storage life and when the batteries have to be replaced. In fact,
PV production is intermittent; thus, PV generators cannot guarantee the optimal
charge-discharge cycles to have the longest possible life of storage and the highest
efficiency. For example, the real-time model described in [39] is a blend of the previ-
ous battery models whose particular combination of components and dependencies
eases the estimation of the equivalent parameters. In conclusion, this model permits
to calculate the SOC, the SOH, and then the residual life. This information permits
the evaluation of the economic investment of electrochemical storage system [40],
taking in consideration the battery management. Nevertheless, the models that
permit to estimate the SOH require a continuous measurement of battery param-
eters (i.e., voltage, current, and temperature of the batteries) [37]. For this reason,
the calculation of the SOH cannot be performed with only simulations, but a real
system with continuous measurements is required.
The energy model is used in the simulations presented in this chapter, because
it permits to simulate the SOC with a good approximation (a few percent points)
without measurements and with a low computation effort (only the formulas
(5) and (6) are used). The energy model permits to estimate the state of charge of
batteries; i.e., how much energy is stored or can be stored in a battery with rated
energy capacity Cbat, by the comparison with the limits imposed to preserve life of
batteries. The calculation of the SOC(t) at the instant t is a function of the state of
charge SOC(t − 1) at the previous time step, of the power exchanged Pbat during the
time step Δt (in this chapter, Δt = 1 min) and of the charge efficiency ηbat. During
the charge phase, the batteries behave as a generator (Pbat > 0) and it is considered
a charge efficiency ηbat = 0.88; during discharge (Pbat < 0), efficiency is considered
unitary.

7
Green Energy Advances

η ∙ P ∙ ∆t
SOC(t) = SOC(t − 1) + ___________
bat bat
Pbat > 0 (5)
Cbat

P ∙ ∆t
SOC(t) = SOC(t − 1) + _______
bat
Pbat < 0 (6)
Cbat

3. Provisional energy balance and storage management

The proposed BMS periodically defines the strategy to minimize the power absorp-
tion from the grid. The strategy selection is performed two times per day to better
match the consumption peaks of domestic users, which occur early in the morning and
during the evening. Thus, the day is divided in three time slots. The first time slot starts
at midnight and ends at 6:00 a.m. Between 6:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., there is the second
time slot: the production is dominant and in case of people at home, part of generation
is self-consumed. In this period, the consumption peak in the morning due to prepara-
tion to work and school activity (such as hairdryers, electric boiler, etc.) is included.
Obviously, this peak cannot be totally satisfied by PV production, especially in winter.
The third time slot starts at 6:00 p.m. and finishes at midnight, when the second
consumption peak occurs, and PV production is low or negligible.
The time 6:00 p.m. is selected for the download of raw weather forecasts for the
next 24 h, for the calculation of provisional energy balance and the update of man-
agement strategy for batteries. In fact, at 6:00 p.m., the PV production is almost
over: the BESS can accurately calculate the quantity of stored energy, which will be
available for the next hours. In fact, during evening and night, the batteries will not
be charged: supply from the grid is not considered.

3.1 Comparison of estimated energy production and consumption

The provisional energy balance for 1-day ahead is performed comparing esti-
mated energy production and consumption. Regarding the energy consumption,
this value is calculated on the basis of measurement of local consumption profiles.
Loads are monitored, and average values of energy consumption are calculated for
each of the three time slots composing the day, as described in the previous para-
graph. In addition, a distinction of average energy consumption between working
days and holidays is considered.
Regarding the provisional production, every day at 6:00 p.m., the converter
downloads raw weather forecasts for the next 24 h. Data are collected from com-
mercial web services: they generally identify weather forecast with simplified
symbols, i.e., showing a sun symbol for a clear sky day and lightning for rain. For
the sake of simplicity, in the present work, it is considered a three-level forecast: a
clear sky day, an average day with few clouds, and a cloudy/rainy day. These levels
correspond to the three irradiance conditions provided by the database PVGIS. In
this way, it is defined a raw correlation between the weather forecast and the
expected production from the PV generator. The advantage consists of a free and
easily accessible daily forecast of production, which can be used for free by the
Internet-connected BESS to select the best battery management.

3.2 Definition of the total discharge time

The first step in the smart management of batteries consists of the definition
of the total discharge time (TDT): Figure 4 shows the flowchart of the procedure.
8
A Smart Battery Management System for Photovoltaic Plants in Households Based on Raw…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.80562

Figure 4.
Definition of the total discharge time (TDT).

First, at 6:00 p.m., after weather forecast download, the provisional balance

between expected production EPV_1day-ahead and loads Eloads_1day-ahead, 6 a.m.-6 p.m. occur-
ring in the time slot 6:00 a.m.–6:00 p.m. of the day ahead is performed.
In case of PV energy production higher than loads EPV_1day-ahead > Eloads_1day-ahead, 6
a.m.–6 p.m., a management of the storage to satisfy loads until 1-day ahead at 6:00 a.m.
is performed. In this case, the TDT will be equal to 12 h. In fact, the day after, dur-
ing light hours, energy will be self-consumed, and the surplus of PV production will
charge the storage or will be injected into the grid. Vice versa, in case of low produc-
tion and high loads EPV_1day-ahead < Eloads_1day-ahead, 6 a.m.–6 p.m., an SBMS is necessary not
only for 1-day head but also for the day after. In this case, the PV production cannot
satisfy local loads and storage has to be able to reduce loads for two nights, and the
TDT will be equal to 36 h.
Batteries are expensive [40], and considering a storage with a too high capacity
is not cost-effective for a grid-connected plant. For this reason, in the present work,
the BESS can distribute the stored energy in a maximum TDT = 36 h. It means that

Figure 5.
Example of PV and load profiles for 2 days.
9
Green Energy Advances

storage must be able to supply the load when a single cloudy day occurs (2 nights
and 1 day).
Figure 5 shows an example of PV and load profiles for 2 days: in the first day, the
PV production is low, while the second one is a clear sky day. At 6:00 p.m. of day #1,
the procedure starts with the converter downloading forecast for day #2: supposing
a correct forecast, the result is a provisional high PV production. Thus, the BESS
will manage the discharge of the storage from the evening of day #1 at 6:00 p.m. to
the morning of day #2 at 6:00 a.m. (12 h). After 6:00 a.m. of day #2, storage and
loads will again be mainly supplied by the PV production.
The second case is shown in Figure 6. It presents an example of PV and load
profiles for 3 days: in the first and second days, the real PV production is low, while
the third one is a clear sky day. At 6:00 p.m. of day #1, the converter downloads
forecast for day #2: supposing a correct forecast, the result is a provisional low
PV production. Thus, the BESS will manage the discharge of the storage until the
morning of day #3 (a total of 36 h, from 18 to 54 h in Figure 6).

3.3 Selection of the storage management strategy

After the definition of the total discharge time (TDT), the procedure continues
with the second part; i.e., the definition of the storage management strategy.
The SOC is calculated at 6:00 p.m. by the BESS, which uses appropriate models
starting from the real-time measurement of voltage and ambient temperature of
batteries, as described in Section 2.1. The rated capacity of the storage and the
SOC permit to calculate the energy that can be provided to the loads Ebatt,disch. The
estimated energy production EPV_1day-ahead is the same quantity used in the previ-
ous step, while the consumption Eload,TDT corresponds to the estimated loads
during the TDT (Figure 7). These raw energy quantities are compared and it is
defined if there is an energy deficit EPV_1day-ahead + Ebatt,disch ≥ Eload,TDT or surplus
EPV_1day-ahead + Ebatt,disch < Eload,TDT.
If the PV production and the storage can satisfy the load EPV_1day-
ahead + Ebatt,disch ≥ Eload,TDT in the selected TDT, no advanced management of the
batteries is required (BMS Strategy #1).
On the contrary, if loads are too high EPV_1day-ahead + Ebatt,disch < Eload,TDT, peak
shaving strategy (BMS Strategy #2) or appropriate discharge profiles (BMS
Strategy #3) are adopted. To select the most appropriate method between BMS

Figure 6.
Example of PV and load profiles for 3 days.

10
A Smart Battery Management System for Photovoltaic Plants in Households Based on Raw…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.80562

Figure 7.
Definition of storage management strategy.

Strategy #2 and BMS Strategy #3, a provisional self-sufficiency Rsuff parameter, that
is, the ratio between the provisional PV production plus the available energy from
the battery, and the provisional local loads, is calculated:

EPV −ahead + Ebatt,disch

Rsuff = ________________
1day
(7)
Eload,TDT

When the ratio Rsuff is lower than a user-defined threshold Rthres, the BMS
Strategy #2 is adopted: the local generators and the storage will provide a low
quantity of energy to the loads, which will be mainly supplied by the grid. It can
result in high absorption peaks. In this case, the low energy quantity stored in the
batteries will be used only when loads exceed a maximum limit Pload,max, such as
the contracted power absorption limit or another user-defined threshold. The BMS
Strategy #3 is adopted when the ratio Rsuff is higher than the user-defined threshold
Rthres and lower than unit value. This case is better than the previous one, because
great part of loads will be supplied by PV and storage and the quote from the grid is
low.

3.4 Implementation of storage management strategies

The storage management strategies consist of peak shaving and of a time-

dependent discharge profile. According to the procedure described in the previous
subsection, when the storage energy is much lower than loads, only the peak shav-
ing technique is adopted (BMS Strategy #2). Thus, batteries are discharged only
when strictly necessary, i.e., when a load peak occurs. In particular, storage will be
discharged only by the quota exceeding an user-defined limit Pload,max.

11
Green Energy Advances

Figure 8.
Example of load and SOC profiles in case of basic BMS.

In the other case, if the energy stored in the batteries is slightly lower than
loads, the charge is used both for baseload supply and peak shaving (BMS Strategy
#3). Nevertheless, the exact time schedule of loads is not predictable and it is not
possible to know when the load peaks will occur. In the worst case, storage will be
discharged soon in the evening, while the peak will be in the next early morning,
when batteries are already empty. For this reason, the SBMS limits the discharge of
batteries during time with the definition of different levels of minimum SOCmin,x
for an user-defined number of time slots x, in which the TDT is divided. According
to the procedure proposed in Section 3.2, in case of TDT = 12 h, the number of time
slots x = 2, otherwise with TDT = 36 h, the time slots are 5 (x = 5). The SOCmin,x
limits are defined in order to distribute the stored energy proportionally to the
provisional energy consumption. Thus, SOCmin,x limits are calculated starting from
the SOC of the storage, measured in real time by the BMS, and the provisional
energy consumptions:

SOCmin,slot x = SOC ∙ (1 − ___________

E
Eload.TDT )
load,slot x
(8)

where Eload, slot x is the provisional energy that will be required by loads in the
time slot x. For example, let us suppose that the TDT is 12 h and the overall required
load will be 10 kWh. In particular, during the evening (from 6:00 p.m. to mid-
night), the required load will be 4 kWh, and during the next night (from midnight
to 6:00 a.m.), the load will be 6 kWh. The stored energy will be discharged as
follows: 40% during the evening and 60% during the night. In this example, the
storage is considered initially full and with a minimum SOCmin,safety = 0.2.
Figure 8 shows an example of load and SOC profiles in case of a basic battery
management. In this case, the storage is charged when PV production is higher
than loads and batteries are empty; on the contrary, storage is discharged if PV
production is lower than loads [23]. The only limitation in charge/discharge is
performed to avoid fast degradation of batteries, by limiting the SOC in a safety
range SOCmin,safety < SOC < SOCmax,safety. For sake of simplicity, it is considered a
rainy day and the production from the PV generator is negligible. In case of lithium
batteries (Figure 8), the minimum level SOCmin,safety generally corresponds to
SOCsafety ≈ 20%, while in case of lead-acid batteries, it can reach 50% [41, 42]. In
the example of Figure 8, the storage supplies the loads until 10:50 a.m., when the
SOCmin,safety is reached. After that, only the grid supplies the load and the highest
absorption peak is not limited ≈2.9 kW.

12
A Smart Battery Management System for Photovoltaic Plants in Households Based on Raw…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.80562

Figure 9.
Example of load and SOC profiles in case of the proposed SBMS.

Figure 9 shows an example of load and SOC profiles in case of the SBMS, which
reduces the absorption peaks from the grid. In this case, the SOC cannot drop down
under a temporary minimum SOCmin,a = 75% before midnight; then, the discharge
is limited by SOCmin,b = 70% between midnight and 06:00 a.m. Between 06:00 a.m.
and 06:00 p.m., the minimum admitted SOCmin,c is 37%. Then, between 06:00 p.m.
and midnight, the limit SOCmin,d = 22%. Finally, after 06:00 p.m., the last limit
corresponds to the same level of the basic management SOCsafety ≈ 20%, which is a
typical value to preserve life of lithium batteries. The main difference from the basic
management consists of a small reserve in storage, which is always present, and the
absorption peaks are always reduced. On the other hand, preserving the storage
partially charged could reduce the self-sufficiency. The best solution consists of the
abovementioned SOC levels selected to reduce absorption peak and keep as high as
possible the self-sufficiency level.

4. Simulation results

4.1 Inputs parameters and constraints of the simulations

Simulations of the PV-storage system are performed for the entire month of
December with a 1-min time step for both basic and proposed BMS to compare their
performance. During winter, the PV production is low, batteries are often empty,
and the development of an efficient BMS is necessary to reduce the absorption
peaks from the grid. On the contrary, in summer, PV generation generally charges
storage and directly supplies part of the loads.
The optimal management of the storage is investigated in case of differ-
ent sizes of the PV system PPV,r and different capacities of the battery Cbat.
Regarding PPV,r, it ranges between 2 and 6 kWp with a step of 1 kW, while the
storage capacity Cbat is in the range 1–5 kWh (step of 1 kWh). The management
parameters are the power value Pload,max beyond which the peak shaving strategy
works and the threshold Rthres. The power limitation Pload,max ranges between 0.5
and 2 kW with a step of 0.5 kW, while the user-defined threshold Rthres varies
between 50 and 80% (step of 10%). Regarding the loads, the measured con-
sumption profile of a domestic user (a family composed of two persons) located
in Northern Italy (45.05° Nord, 7° 40' Est) is used. The annual consumption of

13
Green Energy Advances

the domestic user analyzed in the case study is ≈2800 kWh/year and its loads
correspond to typical home appliances (e.g., hairdryer, oven, personal com-
puter, lighting, and electric water heater).

4.2 Case study

The results of the simulation show that the proposed BMS decreases the peaks of
absorption from the grid with respect to a traditional management. The results are
interesting especially in case of a small storage, while in case of higher storage capac-
ity, there are negligible differences between the two managements. Figure 10 shows
case #1: it corresponds to the analysis of 2 days of simulation for a PV system with
PPV,r = 4 kW and a storage system with Cbat = 2 kWh. In the graphs, in case of battery
discharge, the sign of the power supplied by the storage to the loads is negative. The
2 days are characterized by cloudy and rainy conditions, and the PV production is
low. The proposed BMS calculates the provisional energy balance and a huge lack
in storage is predicted; thus, the peak shaving method is used (BMS Strategy #2).
Before 6:00 p.m., all the loads are supplied by PV and storage; then, peak shaving is
applied and only the quota exceeding Pload,max = 2 kW is satisfied by batteries. The
saved energy is then preserved and used to shave loads during the second day, with
the result of keeping the absorption from the grid always ≤2 kW.
On the contrary, if a standard BMS is used (Figure 11), all the stored energy is
consumed before the end of the evening of the first day; furthermore, there is no
energy from storage to supply the load peaks during the second day. The result is
a maximum absorption peak of ≈4.2 kW: during these days, the proposed SBMS
reduces the absorption peak of ≈50%.
Table 2 shows the energy balance of the case #1 related to Figures 10 and 11.
With the proposed SBMS, the maximum power absorbed from the grid is half,
while the deviations in terms of self-sufficiency and injected energy into the grid
are negligible. Nevertheless, there is an increase in grid absorption: to guarantee
power for peak shaving, a residual energy is kept in the storage, and at 6:00 p.m. of
the second day SOC≈0.7.
A second simulation is shown in Figure 12. The case #2 is characterized by two
different days with respect to case #1: a negligible PV production occurs in both
days, while the sizes of PV and storage systems and loads are the same of case #1.
The provisional energy balance predicts that the energy in the storage will sup-
ply great part of the loads, but it will be not sufficient to supply them totally. The

Figure 10.
Power profiles for case #1 with the proposed SBMS.

14
A Smart Battery Management System for Photovoltaic Plants in Households Based on Raw…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.80562

Figure 11.
Power profiles for case #1 with standard BMS.

provisional self-sufficiency parameter is Rsuff > Rthres (with Rthres = 50%); thus, the

converter selects the BMS Strategy #3. The most interesting part corresponds to
the time window 6:00 a.m.–6:00 p.m. of the second day. Batteries start discharging
at 6:00 a.m. and when peaks occur (10:00–12:00 a.m.), only the quota exceeding
Pload,max = 2 kW is satisfied by batteries. In the same way, the other absorption peak
occurring at 9:00 p.m. is shaved, thanks to the preserved energy in the storage. The
maximum absorption peak is 2.4 kW.
On the contrary, in the same conditions, a traditional BMS would discharge the
battery before 10:00 a.m. and the absorption peak would be 2.8 kW (higher than
the proposed SBMS of ≈14%).
Finally, in Table 3, the above-described combination #A and other three combi-
nations of PV and storage sizes, which permit to obtain significant improvements,
are presented. The power and energy results of the proposed SBMS are compared
to the standard BMS. In all the other cases, the improvement in terms of maximum
absorption from the grid is confirmed, ranging from ~9 to ~10%. Regarding the
maximum injection into the grid and the energy quantities, their deviations are
negligible. The combination #A shows much better results, confirming that the

Proposed BMS Standard BMS

Load (kWh) 11.45 11.45

Self-consumption (kWh) 3.2 3.2

Grid absorption (kWh) 5.5 4.58

Grid injection (kWh) 0.52 0.52

Self-sufficiency/load (%) 28 28

Self-consumption/PV production (%) 43 43

Grid injection/load (%) 4.5 4.5

Pload,max (kW) 2 4.22

Injection peak (kW) −0.81 −0.81

Table 2.
Energy results for case #1.

15
Green Energy Advances

Figure 12.
Power profiles for case #2 with proposed SBMS.

Comb- PPV,r Cbat Pload,max Rthres Standard Proposed Improve-

inations (kW) (kWh) (kW) (%) BMS BMS ment
Pmax,absorbed Pmax,absorbed (%)
(kW) (kW)
#A 4 2 2 50 4.22 2.56 39
#B 2 1 2 70 4.42 4 9.5
#C 3 2 2 80 4.33 3.91 9.7
#D 5 5 1 60 4.10 3.74 8.8

Table 3.
Results of the alternative configurations.

performance of the proposed SBMS increases when the PV system size is high and
when the storage is undersized. In addition, a low value of Rsuff permits to increase
the use of peak shaving, without affecting the energy balance.

5. Conclusions

In the present work, smart BMS for residential users with a grid-connected
PV-storage system is proposed. The BMS is Internet-connected and it downloads
1-day ahead weather forecasts, which are used to obtain a provisional energy
production for the PV generator. These data are compared with load estimations,
based on historical data. The result is a provisional energy balance, which is used
by the BMS to select the best strategy to discharge batteries. In particular, the BMS
preserves battery charge, when high load and low production is expected, and
performs peak shaving, when loads exceed a user-defined limit. The combination
of these methods results in a reduction in absorption peaks from the grid, with
negligible variations in terms of self-sufficiency. The proposed BMS is efficient in
case of undersized batteries, where the energy available in the storage is often not
sufficient to supply all the loads. For example, in case of a family composed of two
persons with a PV plant with rated power 4 kW and a storage of 2 kWh, the reduc-
tion in absorption peak from the grid during winter days varies from 39 to 50%.
Other combinations of PV and storage sizes are investigated and improvements in
terms of peaks reduction are generally around 10%.

16
A Smart Battery Management System for Photovoltaic Plants in Households Based on Raw…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.80562

Nomenclature

Acronyms

ANN artificial neural networks

BS battery system
BMS battery management system
BESS battery energy storage system
MPPT maximum power point tracker
PV photovoltaic
PVGIS Photovoltaic Geographical Information System
RES renewable energy sources
SBMS smart battery management system
STC standard test conditions

Symbols

γth temperature factor of power of PV generator (%/°C)

ηcabl Joule losses
ηcharge charge efficiency of the battery
ηDC/AC DC/AC conversion losses
ηdirt losses due to dirt
ηmis losses due to mismatch
ηmix global losses of PV generator
ηMPPT DC/DC conversion losses
ηrefl losses due to reflection
ηshad losses due to shadings
ηtherm thermal losses of PV generator
Cbat rated capacity of the battery (kWh)
Ebatt,disch battery energy provided to the loads (kWh)
Eload energy consumptions (kWh)
Eloads_1day-ahead, 6 a.m.–6 p.m. 1-day ahead expected loads in the time slot 6 a.m.–6 p.m.
(kWh)
Eload, slot_x provisional loads in the time slot x (kWh)
Eload,TDT estimated loads during the TDT (kWh)
EPV PV production (kWh)
EPV_1day-ahead 1-day ahead expected PV production (kWh)
G solar irradiance (W/m2)
GNOCT solar Irradiance at NOCT conditions (W/m2)
NOCT nominal operating cell temperature (°C)
PAC AC power production of PV generator (kW)
Pbat power exchanged by the battery (kW)
Pload,max maximum load power satisfied by the grid in case of peak
shaving strategy (kW)
Pmax,absorbed maximum power absorbed from the grid (kW)
PPV,r rated power of PV generator (kW)
Rsuff provisional self-sufficiency parameter
Rthre threshold for the parameter Rsuff
SOC state of charge of the battery
SOCmax,safety maximum safety limit of SOC
SOCmin,a minimum SOC in the time slot a
SOCmin,b minimum SOC in the time slot b

17
Green Energy Advances

SOCmin,c minimum SOC in the time slot c

SOCmin,safety minimum safety value of SOC
SOCmin,slot_x minimum SOC in the time slot x
SOH state of health of the battery
Δt simulation time step (min)
t simulation time (min)
Ta ambient temperature (°C)
Tc temperature of PV cells (°C)
TSTC temperature at standard test conditions (°C)
TDT total discharge time of the battery (h)
x user-defined number of time slots in which the TDT is divided

Author details

Filippo Spertino*, Alessandro Ciocia, Paolo Di Leo, Gabriele Malgaroli

and Angela Russo
Energy Department “Galileo Ferraris”, Politecnico di Torino, Italy

*Address all correspondence to: filippo.spertino@polito.it

© 2018 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms
of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited.

18
A Smart Battery Management System for Photovoltaic Plants in Households Based on Raw…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.80562
References
[1] Lahon R, Gupta CP. Energy
management of cooperative microgrids
with high-penetration renewables.
IET Renewable Power Generation.
2018;12(6):680-690. DOI: 10.1049/
iet-rpg.2017.0578
[2] Rubino S, Mazza A, Chicco G,
Pastorelli M. Advanced control of
inverter-interfaced generation behaving
as a virtual synchronous generator. In:
Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE Eindhoven
PowerTech; Eindhoven; 2015. pp. 1-6
[3] Chicco G, Mazza A. An overview
of the probability-based methods for
optimal electrical distribution system
reconfiguration. In: Proceedings of the
2013 4th International Symposium on
Electrical and Electronics Engineering
(ISEEE); Galati; 2013. pp. 1-10
[4] Mazza A, Chicco G, Andrei
H, Rubino M. Determination of
the relevant periods for intraday
distribution system minimum loss
reconfiguration. International
Transactions on Electrical Energy
Systems. 2015;25:1992-2023. DOI:
10.1002/etep.1941
[5] Narducci G, Mazza A, Chicco G,
Bompard E. Battery storage application
for covering the mismatch between
scheduled and CHP plant production.
In: Proceedings of the 2017 52nd
International Universities Power
Engineering Conference (UPEC);
Heraklion; 2017. pp. 1-6
[6] Spertino F, Ahmad J, Chicco G,
Ciocia A, Di Leo P. Matching between
electric generation and load: Hybrid
PV-wind system and tertiary-sector
users. In: Proceedings of the 50th
International Universities Power
Engineering Conference (UPEC); Trent;
2015. pp. 1-6
[7] Ciocia A, Chicco G, Di Leo P, Gai
M, Mazza A, Spertino F, Hadj-Said N.
19
Voltage control in low voltage grids:
A comparison between the use of
distributed photovoltaic converters or
centralized devices. In: Proceedings
of the IEEE International Conference
on Environment and Electrical
Engineering and IEEE Industrial and
Commercial Power Systems Europe
(EEEIC/I&CPS Europe); Milan; 2017.
pp. 1-6
[8] Akarslan E, Hocaoglu FO. Electricity
demand forecasting of a micro grid
using ANN. In: Proceedings of the
9th International Renewable Energy
Congress (IREC); Hammamet; 2018.
pp. 1-5
[9] Koller M, Borsche T, Ulbig A,
Andersson G. Defining a degradation
cost function for optimal control
of a battery energy storage system.
In: Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE
Grenoble Conference; Grenoble; 2013.
pp. 1-6
[10] Bizzarri F, Bongiorno M, Brambilla
A, Gruosso G, Gajani GS. Model
of photovoltaic power plants for
performance analysis and production
forecast. IEEE Transactions on
Sustainable Energy. 2012;4:278-285.
DOI: 10.1109/TSTE.2012.
2219563
[11] Brenna M, Foiadelli F, Longo M,
Zaninelli D. Mint: Solar radiation and
load power consumption forecasting
using neural network. In: Proceedings
of the 2017 6th International Conference
on Clean Electrical Power (ICCEP);
Santa Margherita Ligure; 2017.
pp. 726-731
[12] Lin Q , Yin M, Shi D, Qu H,
Huo J. Optimal control of battery
energy storage system integrated in
PV station considering peak shaving.
In: Proceedings of the 2017 Chinese
Automation Congress (CAC); Jinan;
2017. pp. 2750-2754
Green Energy Advances
[13] Wang B, Zarghami M, Vaziri M.  Technologies Conference Europe
Energy management and peak-shaving
in grid-connected photovoltaic systems
integrated with battery storage.
In: Proceedings of the 2016 North
American Power Symposium (NAPS);
Denver; 2016. pp. 1-5
[14] Pholboon S, Sumner M, Christopher
E, Norman SA. Real-time battery
management algorithm for peak
demand shaving in small energy
communities. In: Proceedings of IEEE
Innovative Smart Grid Technologies
Latin America (ISGT LATAM);
Montevideo; 2015. pp. 19-24
[15] Ranaweera I, Midtgård OM,
Korpås M, Farahmand H. Control
strategies for residential battery
energy storage systems coupled with
PV systems. In: Proceedings of the
2017 IEEE International Conference
on Environment and Electrical
Engineering and 2017 IEEE Industrial
and Commercial Power Systems Europe
(EEEIC); Milan; 2017. pp. 1-6
[16] Marinopoulos A, Papandrea F,
Reza M, Norrga S, Spertino F, Napoli
R. Grid integration aspects of large
solar PV installations: LVRT capability
and reactive power/voltage support
requirements. In: Proceedings of the
2011 IEEE Trondheim PowerTech;
Trondheim; 2011. pp. 1-8
[17] Lamberti F, Calderaro V, Galdi V,
Piccolo A, Gross G. Long-term
performance in providing voltage
support by PV and storage systems in
distribution networks. In: Proceedings
of the 2016 IEEE Power and Energy
Society General Meeting (PESGM);
Boston, MA; 2016. pp. 1-5
[18] Del Giudice A, Wills A, Mears A.  [24] Whitaker CM, Townsend TU,
Development of a planning tool for
network ancillary services using
customer-owned solar and battery
storage. In: Proceedings of the 2017
IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid
20
(ISGT); Torino; 2017. pp. 1-6
[19] Praiselin WJ, Edward JB. 
Improvement of power quality with
integration of solar PV and battery
storage system based micro grid
operation. In: Proceedings of the 2017
Innovations in Power and Advanced
Computing Technologies (i-PACT);
Vellore; 2017. pp. 1-5
[20] Aachiq M, Oozeki T, Iwafune Y,
Fonseca JGS Jr. Reduction of PV reverse
power flow through the usage of EV's
battery with consideration of the
demand and solar radiation forecast. In:
Proceedings of 2013 IEEE International
Electric Vehicle Conference (IEVC);
Santa Clara, CA; 2013. pp. 1-3
[21] Ahmad J, Spertino F, Ciocia A, Di
Leo P. A maximum power point tracker
for module integrated PV systems
under rapidly changing irradiance
conditions. In: Proceedings of the 2015
IEEE 5th Conference on Consumer
Electronics (ICCE); Berlin; 2015.
pp. 519-520
[22] European Commission. Joint
Research Centre, Photovoltaic
Geographical Information System
[Internet]. Available from: http://re.jrc.
ec.europa.eu/pvgis/ [Accessed: June 06,
2018]
[23] Spertino F, Ciocia A, Cocina V, Di
Leo P. Renewable sources with storage
for cost-effective solutions to supply
commercial loads. In: Proceedings of
the IEEE International Symposium on
Power Electronics Electrical Drives
Automation and Motion (SPEEDAM);
Anacapri, Italy; 2016. pp. 242-247
Wenger HJ, Iliceto A, Chimento G,
Paletta F. Effects of irradiance and other
factors on PV temperature coefficients.
In: Proceedings of the Conference
Record of the Twenty-Second
A Smart Battery Management System for Photovoltaic Plants in Households Based on Raw…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.80562
IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists
Conference—1991; Vol. 1. Las Vegas,
NV; 1991. pp. 608-613
[25] Smith RM, Jordan DC, Kurtz SR.  for MPP tracking. Solar Energy.
Outdoor PV module degradation of
current-voltage parameters. In: World
Renewable Energy Forum; May 13-17
2012
[26] Muller M, Marion B, Rodriguez J.  point tracking for a distributed system
Evaluating the IEC 61215 Ed.3 NMOT
procedure against the existing NOCT
procedure with PV modules in a side-
by-side configuration. In: Proceedings
of the 2012 38th IEEE Photovoltaic
Specialists Conference; Austin, TX;
2012. pp. 697-702
[27] Spertino F, Ahmad J, Ciocia A, Di
Leo P. Techniques and experimental
results for performance analysis
of photovoltaic modules installed
in buildings. Energy Procedia.
2017;111:944-953. DOI: 10.1016/j.
egypro.2017.03.257
[28] Khanum KK, Rao A, Balaji NC,
Mani M, Ramamurthy PC. Performance
evaluation for PV systems to synergistic
influences of dust, wind and panel
temperatures: Spectral insight. In:
Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 43rd
Photovoltaic Specialists Conference
(PVSC); Portland, OR; 2016.
pp. 1715-1718
[29] Tanesab J, Parlevliet D, Whale J,
Urmee T, Pryor T. The contribution of
dust to performance degradation of PV
modules in a temperate climate zone.
Solar Energy. 2015;120:147-157. DOI:
10.1016/j.solener.2015.06.052
[30] Spertino F, Ciocia A, Di Leo P,
Tommasini R, Berardone I, Corrado M,
Infuso A, Paggi M. A power and energy
procedure in operating photovoltaic
systems to quantify the losses
according to the causes. Solar Energy.
2015;118:313-326. DOI: 10.1016/j.
solener.2015.05.033
21
[31] Spertino F, Ahmad J, Di Leo P,
Ciocia A. A method for obtaining the
I-V curve of photovoltaic arrays from
module voltages and its applications
2016;139:489-505. DOI: 10.1016/j.
solener.2016.10.013
[32] Hong Y, Yoo T, Chac K, Back K,
Kim YS. Efficient maximum power
under rapidly changing environmental
conditions. IEEE Transactions on Power
Electronics. 2015;30:4209-4218. DOI:
10.1109/TPEL.2014.2352314
[33] Spertino F, Ciocia A, Corona F, Di
Leo P, Papandrea F. An experimental
procedure to check the performance
degradation on-site in grid-connected
photovoltaic systems. In: Proceedings
of the 2014 IEEE 40th Photovoltaic
Specialist Conference (PVSC); Denver,
CO; 2014. pp. 2600-2604
[34] Waag W, Sauer DU. Secondary
Batteries – Lead–Acid Systems | State-
of-Charge/Health. In: Garche J. editor.
Encyclopedia of Electrochemical Power
Sources. 1th ed; 2009:793-804. DOI:
10.1016/B978-044452745-5.00149-0
[35] Einhorn M, Conte V, Kral C, Fleig
J. Comparison of electrical battery
models using a numerically optimized
parameterization method. In: Proceedings
of the IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion
Conference; Chicago, USA; 2011
[36] Hussein AH, Batarseh I. An
overview of generic battery models.
In: Proceedings of the IEEE Power and
Energy Society General Meeting; San
Diego, USA; 2011
[37] Chen M, Rincon-Mora GA.
Accurate electrical battery model
capable of predicting runtime and I-V
performance. IEEE Transactions on
Energy Conversion. 2006;21:504-511.
DOI: 10.1109/TEC.2006.
874229
Green Energy Advances

[38] Einhorn M, Conte V, Kral C,

Fleig J. Comparison of electrical
battery models using a numerically
optimized parameterization method.
In: Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE Vehicle
Power and Propulsion Conference;
Chicago, USA; 2011. pp. 1-7

[39] Cacciato M, Nobile G, Scarcella

G, Scelba G. Real-time model-based
estimation of SOC and SOH for energy
storage systems. IEEE Transactions on
Power Electronics. 2017;32:794-803.
DOI: 10.1109/TPEL.2016.2535321

[40] Tang DH, Eghbal D. Cost

optimization of battery energy storage
system size and cycling with residential
solar photovoltaic. In: Proceedings of
the 2017 Australasian Universities Power
Engineering Conference (AUPEC);
Melbourne, VIC; 2017. pp. 1-6

[41] Anuphappharadorn S, Sukchai

S, Sirisamphanwong C, Ketjoy N.
Comparison the economic analysis of
the battery between lithium-ion and
lead-acid in PV stand-alone application.
Energy Procedia. 2014;56:352-358. DOI:
10.1016/j.egypro.2014.07.167

[42] Percy SD, Aldeen M, Rowe CN,

Berry A. A comparison between
capacity, cost and degradation in
Australian residential battery systems.
In: Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE
Innovative Smart Grid Technologies;
Melbourne; 2016

22